I was just thinking about ways to muck with the spell system. I still think spells should not have levels. But that doesn't mean spell casters don't have spell level slots. What is all spells had various tiers of success and failure with "easy" spells starting at 10+ to succeed and harder spells having success start at 12+ or even 16+. Now the trick here is spellcasters have spells slots 1st through 5th level. The slot level determines the action die: 1st=d12, 2nd=d16, 3rd=d20, 4th=d24 and 5th = d30. (There are only 5 levels of slots.) The die roll also adds your caster level.

You can cast any spell you know/have prepped, using any slot you want. The higher the slot, the greater the chance for success and the higher the possible effect you might get on the table. You can attempt the 16+ spell with 2nd level slot if you are 8th level and still have a decent shot of the spell going off, even the 1st level slot has a 25% chance of success.

I might have to create a new spellcaster class just to see if this would work. Maybe use this for the basis of non-patron magic.

A nice idea, and it will be cool to see what alternate rules you come up with.

Of course, as soon as you do this...

jmucchiello wrote:

"easy" spells starting at 10+ to succeed and harder spells having success start at 12+ or even 16+.

...you essentially have re-invented spell levels. Call 'em "easy versus hard" or "level 1 versus level 3" and it's all the same effect on the rules.

Spell levels are just a way to organize spells and limit how quickly characters can try things, anyway, and in DCC there aren't so many "generic" spells so the GM gets to control what spells are known by which wizards.

"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own." -- Gary Gygax"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!" -- Dave Arneson

I was just thinking about ways to muck with the spell system. I still think spells should not have levels. But that doesn't mean spell casters don't have spell level slots. What is all spells had various tiers of success and failure with "easy" spells starting at 10+ to succeed and harder spells having success start at 12+ or even 16+. Now the trick here is spellcasters have spells slots 1st through 5th level. The slot level determines the action die: 1st=d12, 2nd=d16, 3rd=d20, 4th=d24 and 5th = d30. (There are only 5 levels of slots.) The die roll also adds your caster level.

You can cast any spell you know/have prepped, using any slot you want. The higher the slot, the greater the chance for success and the higher the possible effect you might get on the table. You can attempt the 16+ spell with 2nd level slot if you are 8th level and still have a decent shot of the spell going off, even the 1st level slot has a 25% chance of success.

I might have to create a new spellcaster class just to see if this would work. Maybe use this for the basis of non-patron magic.

I really like this! It works well with the spell charts. I like the idea of 1st level wizards having to be REALLY scared to cast spells, because their actual die is lower. How about this?Instead of Max Spell level, the Wizard gets a pool of Spell dice.

Failed spells mean one of the dice need to be discarded from the pool. Higher order spells already have higher success thresholds. 1st level spells succeed at 12, 2nd at 14, 5th at 20. So anyone can try a higher level spell, but if they don't have the Dice for it ... well they better Burn or it will probably get ugly. This might mean Wizards can know as many Spells as they can find and master, as they are limited by their dicepool.I realize this is sort of a spellpoint system at this point, but I'm kinda digging it.Whew! All this waiting for DCCRPG has my on a houseruling roll!

1) Players will know that d12's and d16's will most likely fail to produce a spell and be discarded, and therefore players will frontload all of their casting attempts with the highest dice first. Once those are burned out, the wizard rapidly (exponentially) loses power.

2) Low level wizards (throwing mostly d12's and d16's) will be hitting those fumbles much more often, quickly turning them into mutated freaks and possibly discouraging novice players.

Although I agree with the general idea. There is no particular reason that spell charts need to start at 11+.

Yeah, it makes it tough on wizards but it also increases versatiity, which i have always liked for the class. One thought i had is that lower level wizards would have to burn stats pretty frequently. Fumbles are also a fair point. For me, this already fits in with houserules ive got going: Luck returns on level advancement and spell fumbles roll on a big wild magic table of which Corruption is much less frequent than in the beta. Btw Im not arguing this should be in the game, i just got really excited about it when i read it.

Yes, essentially, the "spells per day" chart becomes a dice pool from which the caster can cast his spells.

Galadrin wrote:

Neat, but two (possibly unintended) consequences:

1) Players will know that d12's and d16's will most likely fail to produce a spell and be discarded, and therefore players will frontload all of their casting attempts with the highest dice first. Once those are burned out, the wizard rapidly (exponentially) loses power.

This is intended. But don't forget to add caster level to the spell attempt. Rolling a 10+ on d12+1 is indeed scary. But the simplest spells could have spell charts as low as 8+.

Also, frontloading your big dice first is a great way to end up unprepared for something REALLY dangerous later. Wizards who frontload their spells (whether in my system or in the normal system) are just asking for trouble.

Quote:

2) Low level wizards (throwing mostly d12's and d16's) will be hitting those fumbles much more often, quickly turning them into mutated freaks and possibly discouraging novice players.

In my view, the simplest spells should have ZERO chance for causing mutating fumbles. I would save those effects for "dangerous" spells and I would not necessarily base it on fumbles. Rolling a 30+ when casting a spell might get the boss' attention in a way you were not expecting. But cannot speculate on how I might do this since as I understand it, the final DCCRPG rules are a bit more forgiving in terms of producing mutated freaks from low level spells.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum